Democracy vs. Plutocracy

It is my opinion, and the opinion of many others more informed than I, that the imperial elites feel it is their divine right to run this country into the ground for their own personal gain. We are living in a plutocratic society which resembles more of a tyrannical dictatorship than a democracy of, for, and by the people.

Does this give you the warm fuzzies? I doubt it. So why teach this truth in school? Do you really want our nation's children to come home from school angry at the world? Do you want to be the parent sitting across from your 4th grader asking them what they learned in school today, only to find out that they know more about our government than you do?

Now, I am not advocating the further use of this hidden curriculum that sugarcoats our government and its affairs nor do I believe in hiding or deleting the truth. What I am concerned about is that many parents know so little that to educate their young children beyond their knowledge would be insulting.

In casual conversation at a gathering it is considered impolite to bring up the topic of politics. Why is this so? Are we taught this just so that we will not offend others or is there a deeper reason? Who came up with this rule anyway? At once it seems to perpetuate complacency and to prevent us from exercising our first amendment right. By socially prohibiting the proletariat from sharing our viewpoints the plutocracy thwarts our chances of assembly and cohesion in opposition to our current system.

Where are the checks and balances? If all three branches of our government are all congratulating one another on their latest stock purchases and shooting pool at the country club together, then how are the interests of all the constituents in our society being met? Can we honestly say that our current government is "of the people, by the people, and for the people"? I do not think we can.

"Democracy is always a movement of an energized public to make elites responsible-it is at its core and most basic foundation the taking back of one's powers in the face of the misuse of elite power. In this sense, democracy is more a verb than a noun-it is more a dynamic striving and collective movement than a static order or stationary status quo." (West 68)

How do we energize our public? How can we educate our young people without making them bitter and cynical? How do we get complacent adults to challenge the status quo? How can we "exercise the powers of persuasion, to take back the public's attention from superficial and unfulfilling diversions, and to hold our public officials to a higher standard"? (West 73)

Here is an article I found about Plutocracy written by Paul Kurtz for the Council for Secular Humanism. http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/kurtz_20_4.html
If you are interested in challenging the status quo and striving toward true democracy rather than our current plutocracy then check out this site.

For all those of you who will be at Binghamton University next fall, you also might want to consider enrolling in Gladys Jimenez-Munoz's Social Activism. It is a class that requires a lot of passion and time, but if you want a good education on societal and political issues, then this is the class for you!

Censor This!

Censorship is a flagrant violation of our first amendment rights. No special interest group, no matter how fantastic their intentions, should be allowed to decide for our children what they can and can not read. It makes me angry just thinking about it. In fact, I would like to go out and read each and every book on the list of those banned for children and give them as gifts to the kids in my life.

Ravitch talks about the right and the left wings and their opposing viewpoints on what should and should not be included in the literature children are exposed to in school. The things that the right wing people don't want students to read about are the exact things I think we all should know. I honestly feel that the more conservative people of our population are hoping to keep many people ignorant of many things that do not align with their agendas. Left wing has chosen some words they'd rather not see in literature as well and situational things that should change also. Why should either wing have a say? Let's see if we can get this pendulum to stop swinging in favor of one political view point or another and find some common ground. That common ground should be educating our children and helping them to really enjoy reading and learning about the things in life that matter.

Frankly, the founding fathers, or the "founders" as we're supposed to call them, set up the constitution to make sure we all had the opportunity to speak freely and be heard. No individual or political group has the right to infringe on this right that we all share. Authors have a right to tell their story and young learners have a right to read it. It really helps if they read something that interests them and really makes them think.

I found at about.com about censorship and banned books in schools. It was very interesting and reaffirmed a lot of what we covered in class. http://712educators.about.com/cs/bannedbooks/a/bookbanning.htm

Within that article I found another article from the New York Times by Judy Blume about censorship and the Harry Potter Books which really stirred me. As a young girl I loved Judy Blume and I am a huge fan of the entire Harry Potter series. If you have time, you should read it! http://712educators.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=712educators&cdn=education&tm=172&gps=178_1118_1276_651&f=10&su=p554.2.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.judyblume.com/articles/harry_potter_oped.html

The policy makers within a school district or each individual school within the district must make clear where they stand on acceptable literature and use these strict policies and guidelines in their opposition to censorship. In the Reichman reading, he discusses how policy writers should include in their documents a section devoted solely to the controversial materials. By covering their bases on where they stand regarding literature that others might question, they are ensuring that books will have a much more difficult time being banned.

Censorship may keep some children from reading a select few books. However, it may fervently spur more children to seek out and read those books which have been banned. When young minds read material that is banned without the guidance and explanation of a teacher or parent, a lot of opportunity for growth and learning is lost.

Struggling with Assessments

Testing the knowledge of the youngsters we teach is important. We need to understand what they have gleened from the actvities in the classroom. Tests should be based on the subjects covered in class. The subject should be taught for everyone's understanding to improve. As England said, "assessment is for learning not of learning." Teachers may have to exercise different teaching styles to reach all of the different learner's learning styles. Perhaps more time for each subject will also be necessary to ensure that everyone is close to the same level of understanding. Teaching should not be based on prescribed tests from someone outside of the classroom.

All of that said, good teachers usually know the students they teach well enough to know what they excel at and what they struggle with. High stakes testing is more about proving to outsiders that teachers are either doing their job well or not. It is not really about making sure that no child gets left behind. We need to get back to what is fundamental about learning in a classroom. Letting teachers do their personal best to reach each learner and allowing them time in their days to achieve that is key to ensuring that students make real educational gains.

In the England reading, on page 42 she discusses the rapid increase in expenditures for textbooks and standardized tests. Is this a political play between the Bush and McGraw families for both social and fiscal capital? While England says she is not likely to lean toward "political fanaticism," I might be easily swayed in that direction after reading her work and after reading this article: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020128/metcalf It is far too interesting not to read. Honestly, you must make the time to read it, please!

Bush's political agenda and his wish to be the "education president" leaves such a bad taste in my mouth. The law itself is complicated and immense. Parts of it sound so good in theory. When you look at the big picture and you see the results it makes you question his motives and his tactics. Assessment for learning would not produce these results.

My solutions for change... eliminate NCLB, elect a competent president, use tests to help students further their learning, provide alternative methods of assessment like we dicussed in class, and allow teachers the time and autonomy to teach their children effectively. Portfolios, interviews, field trips, practicums, internships are all ways in which we can further student's learning. Taking the time to understand each student's learning style and their intelligences can better equip a teacher to help each child. Let's do this for every child in every school and prepare teachers to teach these children effectively.

Selecting Your School

There are so many choices out there. There are so many schools out there that so many people are unaware of. Many parents probably feel that there is no realistic alternative to the public school in their neighborhood. I knew little or nothing about Charter or MAGNET schools until I took this class. I still don't know much, and I am a fairly educated person. What I have learned is that in order for everyone to have an actual choice, we must make sure there are viable options for people to chose from. I found this website which proposes SOLUTIONS to this problem. If you have time, check it out! http://www.schoolchoices.org/roo/position.htm